There are lots of things to like about both. The headlight covers were neat (when new), but had some issues related to condensate on the glass, as I recall, back then.
Both cars look really good and luxurious in their body styles.
Otherwise . . . the '65 was the first year of the formal C-body platform. Usually, there are some mechanicals which carry over from the prior platforms. One is the shift cables, operated by the steering column shifter rather than the prior pushbuttons. I'm not sure how "close" the two cables are to each other, just that the '65 uses cables as the '66 uses hard linkage (as later model years). This is something I've known about for decades, but never did "worry about it" until more recently. Seems like the parking brake system (on the rear of the transmission tail shaft housing) and rear axle shafts are left-overs from the prior-era platform? 22" wide radiators on factory a/c cars rather than the 26" of '66s?
Nothing the matter with the 413s. The 440s were new in '66 with more power and the then-new 256/260 cam. Both engines have the same-spec cyl heads, basically. For a normal street-driven motor, the exh valve size is not really that important, to me. Just that the engine starts and runs quickly, quietly, and efficiently.
Like most 2nd-year versions of a new platform, the 2nd years are usually more visually and mechanically refined, by observation. Not that the first year cars are bad, just that the 2nd year cars are better-still. Kind of like the design team upgraded or fixed a few things? As the mechanicals for the '66 carried well into the '68 model year and beyond, which is a plus to me.
At the end of the day, it's . . . going to be YOUR car, bought with your money to chase your dreams. Make the best purchase decision just like any other car you might buy. BOTH are still Chryslers built to Chrysler's standards of that era.
Pictures of your final purchase?
CBODY67
I like the styling of BOTH cars, inside and out. The mechanical differences can be dealt with, too.
